|
Q-1120
|
Thursday, April 23, 2026 |
With regard to the announcement on March 16, 2026 by the Minister of National Defence to lease land from Maritime Launch Services through a 10-year, $200-million agreement: (a) what are the details of all emails, memorandums, notes, or other documents related to the topic since October 1, 2016, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title, (v) form (email, memorandum, etc.); (b) what was the criteria used to determine that Maritime Launch Services met the defence and security priorities of the government; (c) did any other applicants apply and what are the details around each application; (d) on what date did the minister learn that Maritime Launch Services was leasing the same land from the province of Nova Scotia for $13,500 per year; (e) what was the rationale for Maritime Launch Services being exempt from a federal impact assessment of the dedicated space-launch pad; (f) what was the rational for backdating the $200 million lease to April 1, 2025 and providing Maritime Launch Services with $20 million for the existing undeveloped concrete pad for the first year of the term ending March 31, 2026; (g) what are the details of all documents outlining the government’s plans to ensure Maritime Launch Services provides a dedicated launch pad and associated services at an initial operational capability state by the end of 2026, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title, (v) form (email, memorandum, etc.), (vi) file number; and (h) on what date did the minister receive the report from Canada’s Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization and what was the response to the finding that Maritime Launch Services' current Chair of the Board had his membership suspended and later revoked for misconduct? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, June 10, 2026 |
|
Q-1109
|
Thursday, April 23, 2026 |
With regard to the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise: (a) on what date did the Ombudsperson position become vacant; (b) has the position remained vacant since that date; (c) how many complaints and investigations were open at the time the position became vacant, broken down by sector and country of alleged harm; (d) what is the current status of each case in (c) and which official or office is responsible for managing them; (e) what is the government's timeline and current stage for appointing a new Ombudsperson; (f) how many Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise investigations have resulted in recommendations to companies, broken down by year, sector, and country; (g) in how many cases were recommendations implemented in full, in part, or not at all; (h) how many investigations have been discontinued, suspended, or delayed due to company non-cooperation, broken down by year and sector, and what percentage of total investigations does this represent; and (i) what is the reason the final Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise report submitted to the Minister of International Trade was not tabled in Parliament as required by Order in Council? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, June 10, 2026 |
|
Q-1108
|
Thursday, April 23, 2026 |
With regard to the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Government of Canada and the Government of Alberta: (a) what actions has the government taken to advance pipeline projects identified, contemplated, or enabled under the Memorandum of Understanding, including, but not limited to, regulatory approvals, project designations, or intergovernmental negotiations; (b) has the government entered into any discussions with pipeline proponents, investors, or provincial officials regarding the approval, expansion, or construction of pipeline infrastructure pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding, and, if so, what were the details of each of those discussions, including the (i) dates, (ii) participants, (iii) subject matter; (c) has the government issued, or prepared any orders, directives, exemptions, or regulatory amendments to facilitate pipeline development under the Memorandum of Understanding, and, if so, what are the details of each; (d) has the government designated, or is it preparing to designate, any pipeline projects as being in the “national interest” or subject to expedited review processes as referenced in the Memorandum of Understanding, and, if so, which projects and under what authority; (e) what are the details of any (i) internal analyses, (ii) briefing notes, (iii) memoranda, (iv) communications which have been prepared since November 27, 2025, regarding pipeline development under the Memorandum of Understanding, including assessments of economic, environmental, and legal implications; (f) has the government engaged with Indigenous communities, rights holders, or organizations regarding pipeline-related components of the Memorandum of Understanding, and, if so, what consultations or discussions have taken place and what issues were raised; (g) what timelines, if any, has the government established to operationalize pipeline-related commitments under the Memorandum of Understanding; (h) how much funding has been allocated to the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding and from what funding envelope; (i) has the government appointed individuals to the Implementation Committee, and, if so, who has been appointed and on what date was each individual appointed; and (j) for the four agreements to be delivered by the Implementation Committee by April 1, 2026, what are the details of all internal analyses, briefing notes, memoranda, or communications prepared on the agreements, and on what date was each agreement completed? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, June 10, 2026 |
|
Q-1077
|
Friday, April 17, 2026 |
With regard to reports that the government is purchasing Canadian flags and Canadian flag pins made outside of Canada: (a) what are the details of all purchases of Canadian flags, Canadian flag pins and similar types of products by Canadian Heritage or Public Services and Procurement Canada, since January 1, 2022, including, for each, the (i) vendor, (ii) amount spent, (iii) types of products (full size flags, desktop flags, paper flags, etc.), (iv) volume of each type of product, (v) date, (vi) country where each product was manufactured; and (b) for each instance in (a) where the products purchased were manufactured outside of Canada, why wasn't a Canadian manufacturer chosen? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, June 3, 2026 |
|
Q-808
|
Tuesday, January 27, 2026 |
With regard to the federal contract for the Rehabilitation Services and Vocational Assistance Program, the acquisition of Lifemark Health Corp. by Loblaws Companies Ltd., and the government’s obligations under federal contracting and conflict-of-interest frameworks: (a) which departments or agencies conducted a conflict-of-interest assessment, ethics review, risk assessment, or political-exposure analysis related to the acquisition; (b) what assessment was done on perceived or actual conflicts of interest arising from the ownership structure of Lifemark, and what was the result of the assessment; (c) what analysis was done regarding veterans’ perceptions of neutrality, independence, or trust in the delivery of rehabilitation services; (d) what are the details, including the dates and summaries, of any internal briefing notes, risk matrices, red-flag analyses, or scenario planning undertaken by Veterans Affairs Canada, Public Services and Procurement Canada, the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Privy Council Office, or the Office of the Prime Minister; (e) has the government undertaken any review of whether the acquisition materially affects the delivery, independence, or governance of the rehabilitation contract, and, if so, what were the findings; (f) did Veterans Affairs Canada, Public Services and Procurement Canada, the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Privy Council Office, the Office of the Prime Minister, or any ministerial office have any communication, written, verbal, electronic, or otherwise, with Loblaws Companies Ltd., or any of its subsidiaries, such as Shoppers Drug Mart Inc., prior to the public announcement of the acquisition regarding (i) the potential impact of the acquisition on the rehabilitation contract, (ii) whether contract assignment, amendment, or compliance reviews would be required; (g) for each communication in (f), what (i) was the date, (ii) was the form, (iii) were the participants, (iv) was the purpose, (v) was the tracking number, (vi) was the subject matter; (h) has the government prepared any briefing materials, key messages, communications products, or stakeholder-management plans relating to the acquisition and its implications for veterans, and, if so, what are the titles, dates, and tracking numbers of each of those documents; (i) has the government conducted any consultation with veterans, veterans’ advocates, or the Office of the Veterans Ombud regarding the acquisition and any perceived impacts on service delivery; and (j) with respect to the exclusivity provisions of the Rehabilitation Services and Vocational Assistance Program contract, (i) what was the original policy and procurement rationale for including an exclusivity clause in the contract, (ii) did the government review the continued appropriateness of that exclusivity following the acquisition of Lifemark by Loblaws Companies Ltd. and, if so, what were the findings, (iii) what assessment was conducted regarding the impact of the exclusivity clause on competition, market concentration, or access to alternative rehabilitation providers and what were the findings, (iv) were any options considered to modify, limit, or remove exclusivity in light of the change in ownership, (v) has the government assessed how the exclusivity clause, combined with the acquisition, may affect veterans’ choice, perceived independence of services, or confidence in the neutrality of rehabilitation delivery and, if so, what were the findings? |
Answered |
Monday, March 23, 2026 |
|
Q-807
|
Tuesday, January 27, 2026 |
With regard to the Apprenticeship Service Employer Grant and other federal apprenticeship grant programs, since 2020, broken down by year and by province: (a) what are the details of (i) how many employers received funding under these programs, (ii) the total number and value of grants issued in each year, including the number of grants issued at the base amount of $5,000 per first-year apprentice and the number issued at the enhanced amount of $10,000 for apprentices from under-represented groups; (b) what is the breakdown of grants issued for apprentices who were (i) Canadian citizens, (ii) permanent residents, (iii) protected persons, (iv) temporary foreign workers; (c) how many employers received funding in excess of two first-year apprentices in a fiscal year and under what authorities or exemptions was such funding permitted; (d) how many grant recipients were verified as meeting the eligibility requirement of being small or medium-sized employers with 499 or fewer paid employees; (e) what is the breakdown of grants by eligible Red Seal trade; (f) how many funded employers were audited for compliance with program eligibility requirements, including verification of net new hire status and registered apprenticeship enrollment; (g) what are the details of how many individual apprentices were registered in more than one eligible Red Seal trade for which the same employer received funding under the Apprenticeship Service Employer Grant or other federal apprenticeship grant programs; (h) how many instances of non-compliance or potentially fraudulent claims were detected; and (i) how many cases identified in (h) involved apprentices who were (i) Canadian citizens, (ii) permanent residents, (iii) protected persons, (iv) temporary foreign workers? |
Answered |
Monday, March 23, 2026 |
|
Q-806
|
Tuesday, January 27, 2026 |
With regard to Civil Aviation Medical Examiners: (a) since 2015, how many Civil Aviation Medical Examiners were certified, broken down by year and by province; (b) how many Civil Aviation Medical Examiners are there currently; (c) how many Civil Aviation Medical Examiners is the government capable of certifying in a given year; and (d) what is the government’s plan to reduce, increase, or maintain the number of Civil Aviation Medical Examiners? |
Answered |
Monday, March 23, 2026 |
|
Q-742
|
Tuesday, December 9, 2025 |
With regard to Canada Child Benefit payments dispersed since January 1, 2016: (a) what is the total value of retroactive Canada Child Benefit payments issued each year, from 2016 to November 2025, in total and broken down by province or territory; (b) how many requests for retroactive Canada Child Benefit payments have been made in each of those years, broken down by (i) Canadian citizens, (ii) permanent residents, (iii) temporary residents, (iv) protected persons or refugee claimants, (v) other non-citizen categories; (c) how many recipients received retroactive Canada Child Benefit payments in each of those years, broken down by (i) Canadian citizens, (ii) permanent residents, (iii) temporary residents, (iv) protected persons or refugee claimants, (v) other non-citizen categories; (d) what is the total dollar amount of retroactive Canada Child Benefit payments paid to non-Canadian citizens, for each year since 2016; (e) what eligibility criteria are used to determine whether a non-citizen may receive retroactive Canada Child Benefit payments, and what verification processes are in place to confirm ongoing eligibility; (f) how many cases of retroactive Canada Child Benefit payments involving non-citizen recipients have been recorded each year; (g) what is the total value of the retroactive Canada Child Benefit payments in (f); (h) what is the average number of months of retroactive Canada Child Benefit payments received, broken down by year and by province or territory; and (i) what is the most retroactively, in terms of time, that a payment was issued? |
Answered |
Monday, January 26, 2026 |
